Preliminary sensitivity study of eruption source parameters for operational volcanic ash cloud transport and dispersion models — A case study of the August 1992 eruption of the Crater Peak vent, Mount Spurr, Alaska |
| |
| Authors: | PW Webley BJB Stunder KG Dean |
| |
| Institution: | aArctic Region Super Computing Center, 909 Koyukuk Drive, University of Alaska Fairbanks, 99775, USA;bAir Resources Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1315 East–West Highway, Silver Spring, Maryland, 20910, USA;cAlaska Volcano Observatory/Geophysical Institute, 903 Koyukuk Drive, University of Alaska Fairbanks, 99775, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | Ash clouds are one of the major hazards that result from volcanic eruptions. Once an eruption is reported, volcanic ash transport and dispersion (VATD) models are used to forecast the location of the ash cloud. These models require source parameters to describe the ash column for initialization. These parameters include: eruption cloud height and vertical distribution, particle size distribution, and start and end time of the eruption. Further, if downwind concentrations are needed, the eruption mass rate and/or volume of ash need to be known. Upon notification of an eruption, few constraints are typically available on many of these source parameters. Recently, scientists have defined classes of eruption types, each with a set of pre-defined eruption source parameters (ESP). We analyze the August 18, 1992 eruption of the Crater Peak vent at Mount Spurr, Alaska, which is the example case for the Medium Silicic eruption type. We have evaluated the sensitivity of two of the ESP – the grain size distribution (GSD) and the vertical distribution of ash – on the modeled ash cloud. HYSPLIT and Puff VATD models are used to simulate the ash clouds from the different sets of source parameters. We use satellite data, processed through the reverse absorption method, as reference for computing statistics that describe the modeled-to-observed comparison. With the grain size distribution, the three options chosen, (1) an estimated distribution based on past eruption studies, (2) a distribution with finer particles and (3) the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration HYSPLIT GSD, have little effect on the modeled ash cloud. For the initial vertical distribution, both linear (uniform concentration throughout the vertical column) and umbrella shapes were chosen. For HYSPLIT, the defined umbrella distribution (no ash below the umbrella), apparently underestimates the lower altitude portions of the ash cloud and as a result has a worse agreement with the satellite detected ash cloud compared to that with the linear vertical distribution for this particular eruption. The Puff model, with a Poisson function to represent the umbrella cloud, gave similar results as for a linear distribution, both having reasonable agreement with the satellite detected cloud. Further sensitivity studies of this eruption, as well as studies using the other source parameters, are needed. |
| |
| Keywords: | volcanic ash dispersion modeling and eruption source parameters |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
